Clark v. Jeppeson et al

Filing 30

ORDER OF RECUSAL re 27 MOTION for Recusal filed by Douglas Daniel Clark. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 3/25/11. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(nah, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/25/2011)

Download PDF
Clark v. Jeppeson et al Doc. 30 1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 OAKLAND DIVISION 6 7 8 9 10 v. RICARDO BRAU, et al., Defendants. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 P:\PRO-SE\PJH\CR.08\CLARK4224.RECUSE.wpd DOUGLAS DANIEL CLARK, No. C 08-4224 PJH (PR) Plaintiff, ORDER OF RECUSAL United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California / This is a civil rights case filed pro se by a state prisoner. It was twice dismissed with leave to amend. Plaintiff has now filed another amended complaint and a second motion to recuse the undersigned. Because the reasons for recusal plaintiff sets out in his motion are frivolous, malicious, or untrue, the motion (document number 27 on the docket) is DENIED. However, in the latest amended complaint, plaintiff contends that four defendants including the undersigned conspired to cause an earlier case to be dismissed. Because the undersigned is named as a defendant, recusal sua sponte recusal is warranted. See 28 U.S.C. 455(b)(5)(I) (a federal judge "shall" disqualify him or herself when "a party to the proceeding. . . ."). The assignment committee shall randomly reassign this case to another judge. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 25, 2011. PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON United States District Judge

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?